Let’s just imagine together: you’re a senior researcher in charge of prestigious research institution. This institution produces its own in-house journal, which you are heavily involved in the editing of and have used to publish a number of your own papers over the years. Suddenly, you become aware of some rather unsavoury accusations being aimed in your direction, of not one, but three, instances where you have used your association with the in-house journal to “claim jump” research – rushing out a publication to claim precedence over someone else’s work that you had learnt about through back-channels. Of course, you are completely innocent, but you have to admit that as presented, the case reflects extremely badly on you, your institution, and your field in general. Your accusers – junior researchers who are of course quite sensitive about getting due credit for their work – are clearly upset by what they consider to be theft of their ideas. Should you:

(a) Act quickly to repair the damage, by publicly explaining the mistakes which led to this depolarable situation. Constructively engage with the injured parties, working to alleviate their hurt feelings, and towards finding ways to prevent similar unpleasantness in the future.
(b) Say nothing. Allow your bosses to convene an “independent inquiry” where two of your mates ask, “it was all just a misunderstanding, wasn’t it?” and close the book after you say “yes.” Look on mutely when a letter written by one of them hits the public domain three days before the inquiry is due to convene, proclaiming your innocence and dismissing the injured parties as embittered junior academics trying to blame someone else for their own inadequacies.

A no brainer, right? Right?
Continue reading →